[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Grant residents see turbines as nuisance  

KEYSER – Whether or not wind power is economical or useful is not important to the public nuisance case that has been filed against NedPower by a number of Grant County residents.

Furthermore, it will not be allowed as a part of future arguments in court.

Circuit Court Judge Phil Jordan on Tuesday told attorney Richard Neely, representing the residents, that to allow arguments as to the social value or economic worth of wind power would amount to “heading off on a tangent that would be costly in terms of the court’s time, your time and your clients’ resources.”

The residents, who live in the Mount Storm area, are seeking an injunction to stop the construction of almost 200 wind turbines adjacent to the Dominion Mount Storm Power Plant. They claim the turbines would devalue their property and generally create a nuisance that would interfere with their quality of life.

The case, which began more than a year ago and has since been appealed to the West Virginia Supreme Court, is back in the local venue after the Supreme Court upheld the plaintiff’s appeal.

Upon returning to court in Petersburg earlier this year, the attorneys for both sides began haggling over which information is pertinent to the case and which should be inadmissible to the proceedings.

While Neely has claimed that NedPower should provide information on tax incentives provided for constructing the wind turbines as well as information on how the turbines work, how much energy they produce and at what profit the energy will be sold, NedPower attorney A.L. Emch of Charleston said such information is “proprietary and private and has no relevance” to the case.

Jordan agreed with Emch, granting a protective order on each of the issues dealing with tax incentives, profits and other financial matters.

This left the attorneys with the main issue at question: Whether the presence of the wind turbines will constitute a nuisance to the property owners.

Noting that the Supreme Court had already “put to rest a lot of the concerns” as to the value of wind power, Neely said the high court also expressed that “you can have a right thing in a wrong place.”

He contends that Grant County is the wrong place.

“Our plaintiffs’ property is located in an area that’s best use is the location of second homes and retirement homes,” he said.

“It is an area where people can retreat from the horrors of the Northeast.”

The presence of the giant turbines will disturb the peace of the area, he said.

“These things cause (the plaintiffs) an enormous annoyance,” he said. “They make an enormous amount of noise … and it’s not a noise that you can get used to.”

Calling his clients “a group of landowners who are supported by … various organizations interested in preserving the beauty of the mountains,” Neely said the wind turbines will devalue that land.

He also questioned what, if anything, would become of the turbines once the tax credits have expired.

“What will happen to this $30 million of abandoned turbines?” he said.

Although no windmills had yet been constructed when the Grant County landowners started their case, several have already been erected and put into use.

When Jordan originally heard the case a year ago, he denied the plaintiffs’ request for relief.

Although no date has been set for the continuation of the case, both attorneys said they expect to begin taking depositions in the near future.

By Liz Beavers

Cumberland Times-News

21 November 2007

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.